Postmodernism

Defining the term "postmodern" is a problematic endeavor at best, given that many theories falling under the broad rubrics "postmodern" or "poststructuralist," most notably Derridean deconstruction, have undermined the very project of definition by showing that meaning is always deferred along an endless signifying chain. Moreover, theories and theorists that have been labeled "postmodern" often differ wildly from each other, further complicating attempts to construct even the most provisional definition of the term by way of a common group of practioners or shared theoretical tenets. One useful way to begin thinking about postmodern theory, however, may be to look at the ways that it differs from and indeed is highly critical of some of the major philosophical assumptions of modernism.

In The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Jean-Francois Lyotard uses the term "modern" to describe "any science that legitimates itself with reference to a metadiscourse…making an explicit appeal to some grand narrative, such as the dialectics of Spirit, the hermeneutics of meaning, the emancipation of the rational or working subject, or the creation of wealth" (xxiii). Metanarratives are grand totalizing philosophies that attempt absolute explanations of systems and events and that are grounded upon some transcendental truth, such as God or the progressive movement of history toward human perfection. In simpler terms, metanarratives can be understood as stories that are told to explain, legitimize, and buttress existing belief systems. According to Lyotard, all aspects of modern societies rely upon their own grand narratives. For example, Marxism has as its metanarrative the notion that capitalism will eventually collapse and a utopian socialist world will emerge in its place. Lyotard defines "postmodern" as "incredulity toward metanarratives." Postmodernist theory critiques grand narratives, disrupting their foundational principles and the "absolutes" upon which they rely by highlighting the contradictions and instabilities that are inherent in any social organization or practice.

Modernist metanarratives rely upon another assumption that postmodernism calls into question: the belief in objective knowledge. Modernism assumes that language and knowledge systems refer directly to an objective reality that appears in the same way to every rational observer. In contrast with the modernist belief that human beings can both objectively perceive reality and accurately represent that reality through discourse, postmodernists argue that we can never have any direct access to reality, and as such, every representation of reality is an interpretation that is influenced by the experiences, identifications, desires, values, attitudes, etc. of the observer. For postmodernists then, neither reality nor meaning can ever definitively be pinned down as "truth." Rather, every definition of reality, any identification of meaning is always an interpretation, a contingent construct. There can be no one truth, no one "correct" narrative, no one accurate form of knowledge or way of knowing; there are only a variety of competing discourses that attain truth value to the degree to which they conform to and buttress dominant regimes of power.

Freirean critical pedagogy (see critical pedagogy definition and Paulo Freire) has been problematized by postmodern educators for its reliance upon modernist assumptions. Three major areas of criticism include critical pedagogy's deployment of static definitions and categories that pass themselves off as transparent and self-evident, its assumption that there is an objective reality that will be understood the same way by any "rational" mind, as well as its reliance upon a dialectical Marxist metanarrative of liberation (see liberatory education). Critical pedagogy's essentialist use of terms such as "false consciousness" (see "mystification"), "reality," and "humanization" are inconsistent with a more postmodern world view that sees one consciousness or perception of reality as no more "true" or accurate than another. Rather, all interpretations of reality are just that--interpretations--and no one has direct access to reality or the thing in itself. Essentialist definitions then of what constitutes oppression, humanization, and liberation become decidedly unstable.

Freire's notion that critical reflection leads to consciousness of oppressive conditions, which will then necessarily lead to engagement in the struggle for liberation, is also problematic, as it assumes that there is a static reality that people can discover, and that everyone will understand this reality in the same way. For Freire, this shared understanding necessarily leads to a uniform plan of action that every person who has shed her "false-consciousness" will agree is necessary and liberating. Such a framework ignores difference: both different perspectives and interpretations of reality as well as different formulations of how or whether or not to act in response to what is perceived. In short, although critical pedagogy challenges the knowledge claims of the dominant culture, postmodernist criticism has highlighted its failure to turn its critical gaze upon its own potentially limiting metanarratives and essentialist categories.

Although postmodernists critique metanarratives, including the liberatory metanarrative that some versions of critical pedagogy rely upon, this is not to say that postmodernists don't believe in the possibility of social change or in the importance of challenging oppressive regimes of power. Many postmodern educators continue to engage in a critical pedagogy that aims to challenge the legitimacy of a variety of metanarratives that perpetuate racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. without resorting to essentialist constructions of race, gender, and sexuality nor liberal humanist narratives that rely upon a progressive view of history. In short, the critical pedagogical project of interrogating institutional structures that are implicated in relations of domination and oppression can be consistent with postmodernism. As Henry Giroux points out, postmodernism can be viewed as equipping critical pedagogues with "a new set of theoretical tools for...[raising] important questions about how narratives get constructed, what they mean, how they regulate particular forms of moral and social experience, and how they presuppose and embody particular epistemological and political views of the world" (Postmodernism as Border Pedagogy: Redefining the Boundaries of Race and Ethnicity 233-234). In contrast with those educators who rely upon a Freirean emancipatory narrative, postmodern educators are aware that they cannot assume that the development of a critical consciousness will lead their students to see reality in a predefined, uniform way nor to agree about how to act or whether or not to act in response to their perceptions. Rather, postmodern critical educators can expect that their diverse students will have radically different responses to class discussions that they cannot anticipate in advance (and possibly may not like much). Instructors need not see lack of classroom consensus or student unwillingness to adopt radical political positions as a failure on either their parts nor their students', but rather they can seize upon these moments as productive spaces that allow for and affirm difference.